Comparing 0.2 tesla with 1.5 tesla intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging: Analysis of setup, workflow, and efficiency

被引:64
|
作者
Nimsky, C [1 ]
Ganslandt, O [1 ]
Fahlbusch, R [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Erlangen Nurnberg, Dept Neurosurg, D-91054 Erlangen, Germany
关键词
functional navigation; intraoperative imaging; resection control; workflow analysis;
D O I
10.1016/j.acra.2005.05.020
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Rationale and Objectives. To compare low-field with high-field intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in respect to setup, workflow, and efficiency. Materials and Methods. A total of 750 patients were investigated either with a 0.2 T (March 1996-July 2001) or a 1.5 T (April 2002-August 2004) MRI system adapted for intraoperative use. Results. With the low-field setup, 330 patients were examined in 65 months; with the high-field setup, 420 patients were examined in 29 months, which is a 2.8-fold increase in cases per month (14.5 versus 5.1) reflecting improved ease of use. Concerning intraoperative workflow, the time for preparation to start intraoperative imaging decreased fivefold (2 minutes instead of 10 minutes); navigation was applied more often with 57% versus 51% (240/420 versus 167/330), whereas functional data were integrated in 35% versus 39% (84/240 versus 65/167). Application of navigation updates was doubled (22% versus 11%; 53/240 versus 18/167). Image acquisition time was reduced by a factor of two, allowing a more detailed imaging protocol, whereas the image quality is clearly improved in the high-field setup, where there was no difference between the standard preoperative image quality compared with the intraoperative quality. This contributed to an increased detection of tumor remnants and extended resections in pituitary (36% versus 29%; 47/129 versus 17/59) and glioma surgery (41% versus 26%; 38/93 versus 28/106). Conclusion. Compared with the low-field setup, the high-field setup results not only in clearly superior image quality and increased imaging armamentarium, contributing to increased rates of detected tumor remnants, but also in a distinct improvement of intraoperative workflow. Furthermore, intraoperative high-field MRI offers various modalities beyond standard anatomic imaging, such as magnetic resonance spectroscopy, diffusion tensor imaging, and functional MRI.
引用
收藏
页码:1065 / 1079
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Implantable microstimulator: Magnetic resonance safety at 1.5 Tesla
    Shellock, FG
    Cosendai, G
    Park, SM
    Nyenhuis, JA
    INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2004, 39 (10) : 591 - 599
  • [42] Myocardial tagging and strain analysis at 3 Tesla: Comparison with 1.5 Tesla imaging
    Valeti, VU
    Chun, W
    Potter, DD
    Araoz, PA
    McGee, KP
    Glockner, JF
    Christian, TF
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2006, 23 (04) : 477 - 480
  • [43] Imaging islets labeled with magnetic nanoparticles at 1.5 Tesla
    Tai, Joo Ho
    Foster, Paula
    Rosales, Alma
    Feng, Biao
    Hasilo, Craig
    Martinez, Violetta
    Ramadan, Soha
    Snir, Jonatan
    Melling, C. W. James
    Dhanvantari, Savita
    Rutt, Brian
    White, David J. G.
    DIABETES, 2006, 55 (11) : 2931 - 2938
  • [44] Cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging at 3-Tesla for the detection of coronary artery disease - A comparison with 1.5-Tesla
    Cheng, Adrian S. H.
    Pegg, Tammy J.
    Karamitsos, Theodoros D.
    Searle, Nick
    Jerosch-Herold, Michael
    Choudhury, Robin P.
    Adrian, P. Banning
    Neubauer, Stefan
    Robson, Matthew D.
    Selvanayagam, Joseph B.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2007, 49 (25) : 2440 - 2449
  • [45] K-T sense-accelerated myocardial perfusion magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 Tesla: Comparison with 1.5 Tesla
    Schwitter, J.
    Kozerke, S.
    Maredia, N.
    Suerder, D.
    Greenwood, J. P.
    Boesiger, P.
    Plein, S.
    HEART, 2008, 94 : A82 - A83
  • [46] Transcranial Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Focused Ultrasound with a 1.5 Tesla Scanner: A Prospective Intraindividual Comparison Study of Intraoperative Imaging
    Gagliardo, Cesare
    Cannella, Roberto
    D'Angelo, Costanza
    Toia, Patrizia
    Salvaggio, Giuseppe
    Feraco, Paola
    Marrale, Maurizio
    Iacopino, Domenico Gerardo
    D'Amelio, Marco
    La Tona, Giuseppe
    La Grutta, Ludovico
    Midiri, Massimo
    BRAIN SCIENCES, 2021, 11 (01) : 1 - 12
  • [47] Magnetic resonance imaging of the ankle at 3.0 Tesla and 1.5 Tesla in human cadaver specimens with artificially created lesions of cartilage and ligaments
    Bauer, Jan S.
    Barr, Cameron
    Henning, Tobias D.
    Malfair, David
    Ma, C. Benjamin
    Steinbach, Lynne
    Link, Thomas M.
    INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2008, 43 (09) : 604 - 611
  • [48] Image Artifacts on Prostate Diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Trade-offs at 1.5 Tesla and 3.0 Tesla
    Mazaheri, Yousef
    Vargas, H. Alberto
    Nyman, Gregory
    Akin, Oguz
    Hricak, Hedvig
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2013, 20 (08) : 1041 - 1047
  • [49] Magnetic resonance imaging of the spine at 3 Tesla
    Fries, Peter
    Runge, Val M.
    Kirchin, Miles A.
    Watkins, David M.
    Buecker, Arno
    Schneider, Guenther
    SEMINARS IN MUSCULOSKELETAL RADIOLOGY, 2008, 12 (03) : 238 - 252
  • [50] Delineation of Alar Ligament Morphology: Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 1.5 and 3 Tesla
    Schmidt, Peter
    Mayer, Thomas E.
    Drescher, Robert
    ORTHOPEDICS, 2012, 35 (11) : E1635 - E1639